US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 11,725
JACOBS v. ZAKEN
as 2:2024cv00601
Plaintiff:
DANIEL JACOBS
Defendant:
MICHAEL ZAKEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
ANTHONY v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 1:2024cv00116
Plaintiff:
SCOTT A. ANTHONY
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
WOOD v. USA
as 2:2024cv00606
Petitioner:
CLIFFORD WOOD
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
SHAMRO v. PENNSYLVANIA PAROLE BOARD et al
as 2:2024cv00608
Petitioner:
JOSH SHAMRO
Respondent:
PENNSYLVANIA PAROLE BOARD and SUPERINTENDENT OF SCI MERCER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
GERMANY v. KLINEFELTER et al
as 2:2024cv00588
Petitioner:
TYRONE GERMANY
Respondent:
SCOTT KLINEFELTER and MICHELLE A. HENRY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SARKISOV v. UNDERWOOD
as 3:2024cv00088
Petitioner:
EDUARD SARKISOV
Respondent:
WARDEN MICHAEL UNDERWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Richard v. Smith et al
as 3:2024cv00089
Plaintiff:
CARL RICHARD
Defendant:
SUPERINTENDENT BARRY SMITH, WELLPATH MEDICAL CO., DR. MUHAMMAD NAJI and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00591
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
WALLACE v. BARNACLE et al.
as 3:2024cv00087
Defendant:
SHAWN WALLACE, J. BARNACLE, D. RADZIEWICZ and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
SEWELL v. UNDERWOOD
as 3:2024cv00082
Petitioner:
PAUL SAMUEL SEWELL
Respondent:
MICHAEL UNDERWOOD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
